McGuffin

June 3, 2016October 10, 2016Hannah McCall Leave a comment

This week’s interesting word is probably familiar to film fans, but you can find a McGuffin in all sorts of narrative works.

A McGuffin (or MacGuffin) is an object, device or event that has only one true purpose: to set the plot in motion. The audience is usually initially told that the object or thing is extremely important, but the McGuffin does not often have any real importance as the plot develops. The McGuffin is the soon-to-be-stolen diamond or the missing USB drive that serves to start and drive the story.

The precise definition of a McGuffin is widely debated, but the origin is attributed to Alfred Hitchcock. The OED gives the first recorded usage as in 1939:

“In regard to the tune, we have a name in the studio, and we call it the ‘MacGuffin’. It is the mechanical element that usually crops up in any story. In crook stories it is always the necklace and in spy stories it is always the papers. We just try to be a little more original.”

– Alfred Hitchcock, Lecture at Columbia University

Hitchcock suggests he took the surname MacGuffin from a humorous story involving a McGuffin-type incident. The choice of name is not thought to be related to the word guffin, meaning ‘a stupid or clumsy person’.

Source:

The Oxford English Dictionary Online

i before e except after c

June 1, 2016June 1, 2016Hannah McCall 2 Comments

I was fairly young when I found that the rule ‘i before e except after c’ sometimes led my spelling astray. I remember being very disappointed that adults had told me something that wasn’t completely true.

It would probably have helped if someone had told me it is spelling advice that only really applies when the combination of i and e is pronounced ee:

believe
ceiling
receive
siege

If the combination of i and e is pronounced ay, the rule does not apply:

beige
neighbour

The rule also does not apply if the combination is pronounced i:

eider
height

Or if the i and the e are pronounced separately:

holier
occupier

There are some words that simply do not obey the rule, and these just have to be learnt:

caffeine
heir
species

The simple and general explanation for the exceptions is that many of those words were formed differently (from two or more parts) or come from another language. I would have been placated by that.

Sources:

Fowler, H. W. and Butterfield, J. (2015) Fowler’s dictionary of modern English usage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
New Hart’s rules: the handbook of style for writers and editors (2014) 2nd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

‘Prescribe’ and ‘proscribe’

May 30, 2016Hannah McCall 10 Comments

Prescribe and proscribe do not mean the same thing. In some circumstances, it may be very important to know exactly which word to use. Most people are probably familiar with prescribe because it is the correct word for ‘to issue a prescription for medicine’.

Prescribe

to recommend or authorise the use of
to state authoritatively or lay down as a rule

Proscribe

to prohibit or forbid
to condemn or denounce; to outlaw or banish

My suggestion for remembering which word to use is to associate prescribe with yes and proscribe with no.

Nycthemeron

May 27, 2016October 10, 2016Hannah McCall 4 Comments

This week’s interesting word is a borrowing from Greek. A nycthemeron is a period of twenty-four hours – one day and one night.

It can also be spelt nychthemeron. It is a term that seems to be used predominantly in academic texts, but I think it would fit in nicely in works of a more fantastical nature.

The OED gives the earliest recorded usage as follows:

“Onely the shadowy Vale of the Night will be cast over them once in a Nycthemeron.”

– Henry More, Two choice and useful treatises. 1682

I have taken this explanation of the origin directly from Oxford Dictionaries Online because Greek language is not my speciality:

“From Hellenistic Greek νυχθήμερον period of a day and a night, use as noun of neuter singular of νυχθήμερος lasting for a day and a night from ancient Greek νυκτ-, νύξ night + ἡμέρα day.” (You can view the entry here.)

Follow my blog with Bloglovin

Won’t

May 25, 2016Hannah McCall 4 Comments

Have you ever wondered why the contraction of will not is won’t?

Do not becomes don’t, cannot becomes can’t, and shall not becomes shan’t. Won’t does not follow the same pattern.

That is because won’t is actually a contraction of woll not. Woll is an archaic form of will; many Germanic languages have or had a similar word with a similar meaning.

Won’t fought off competition from other forms including wonnot, woonnot and wo’nt to become the standard contraction we use today.

We may no longer use woll, but it is easy to see why English has retained won’t instead of using willn’t or even win’t.

Sources:

Fowler’s Dictionary of Modern English Usage, Jeremy Butterfield (ed.)
The Oxford English Dictionary (online)

‘Faun’ and ‘fawn’

May 23, 2016Hannah McCall Leave a comment

This post is an excuse to use a cute photo. The delightful creatures you see when walking your dog are fawns; the mythological creatures you read about are fauns.

Fawn

a deer aged under one year
(of a deer) to produce young
a pale brown colour
to give a display of insincere or exaggerated flattery
to try to please someone by a show of extreme friendliness or affection

Faun

a being that is part human and part goat (usually in Roman mythology)

Temerarious

May 20, 2016October 10, 2016Hannah McCall 3 Comments

Temerarious is a word that is only really at home in literary texts. It means ‘reckless’, ‘rash’ or ‘unreasonably adventurous’.

If you try to give a tiger a cuddle, you are being temerarious.

You may find in some historical texts that temerarious has been used to mean ‘haphazard’ or ‘happening at random’, but this usage is now obsolete.

The OED gives the first recorded usage as in 1532. But I think this is a good example of temerarious used well:

“The King was one of the first that entred [the breach], choosing rather to be thought temerarious then timorous.”

– John Speed, The history of Great Britaine under the conquests of ye Romans, Saxons, Danes and Normans. 1611

The word comes from the Latin temerarius , where temere means ‘rashly’. (The word temerity, meaning ‘excessive confidence’ or ‘audacity’, also has its roots in temere.) The suffix -ous denotes ‘full of’ or ‘characterised by’. The noun is temerariousness.

Source:

The Oxford English Dictionary Online

‘Tuba’ and ‘tuber’

May 9, 2016Hannah McCall 3 Comments

Foodies, gardeners and musicians are probably well aware of the difference between a tuba and a tuber.

Tuba

a large, low-pitched brass musical instrument with valves and a broad bell (that typically faces upwards)

Tuber

a fleshy, thickened underground root or stem of a plant
a rounded swelling or protuberance

Accidentally writing about someone ‘playing a tuber’ would be unfortunate. My suggestion is to try to remember that a tuber grows underground.

Noonlight

May 6, 2016October 10, 2016Hannah McCall 2 Comments

The weather where I live has been lovely this week. It has inspired me to choose noonlight as this week’s interesting word.

Words such as daylight, twilight and moonlight are common, but noonlight is fairly rare.

Noonlight is the light of the sun at noon. It is usually the brightest and clearest light of the day.

Noonlight’s origins are simple (‘noon’ plus ‘light’). The OED gives its first use as in 1598, but this usage resonated when I looked out of my window today:

“Through the blue dazzling distance of noon-light“

– James Montgomery, Bolehill Trees in The West Indies, and other poems. 1810

Source:

The Oxford English Dictionary Online

‘Cf.’ does not mean ‘see’

May 4, 2016October 10, 2016Hannah McCall 5 Comments

The abbreviation cf. means ‘compare’. It is an abbreviation of the Latin word confer. Because cf. is a shortening of a single word, it requires one full point at the end and shouldn’t have a full point between the c and f.

Cf. should be used when you would like the reader to compare one piece of writing with another.

“Ekivrid’s shield … lacked the ‘umbo’, the metal-boss of Waltharius’s. (Cf. lines 772 and 776.)”

– K. J. Leyser, Medieval Germany and its Neighbours. 1982

Books2 There is a widespread tendency to use cf. to mean ‘see’ or ‘see also’. This usage is usually frowned upon (see New Hart’s, The Chicago Manual of Style, and the Penguin Guide to Punctuation).

I recommend using cf. only when you are directing the reader to look at something else in order to make a comparison; you should use see or see also when you are simply inviting them to read something else for more information. If you stick to this distinction, it should be clear to the reader why you have suggested they seek out the other work.